DENR v.

YAP
FACTS:
On November 10, 1978, then President Marcos issued Proclamation No. 1801 declaring
Boracay Island, among other islands, caves and peninsulas in the Philippines, as tourist
zones and marine reserves. PTA Circular 3-82 was later issued to implement Proc. No. 1901.
Mayor Yap Jr. and others then filed a petition for declaratory relief, claiming that Proc. No.
1801 and Circular 3-82 precluded them from filing an application for judicial confirmation of
imperfect title or survey of land for titling purposes. They declared that they had been in
open, continuous and exclusive possession and occupation in Boracay since time
immemorial. In fact, they declared their lands for tax purposes and paid realty taxes. Since
the island was classified as a tourist zone, it was susceptible to private ownership. Hence,
they had the right to have the lots registered in their names through judicial confirmation of
imperfect titles.
During the pendency of the case, President Arroyo issued Proc. No. 1064 classifying Boracay
island as partly reserved forest land (protection purposes) and partly agricultural land
(alienable and disposable)
Other landowners in Boracay filed a petition for prohibition and nullification of the said Proc.
No. contending that the same infringed on their prior vested rights over portions of Boracay
since they have been in continued possession of their respective lots since time immemorial.
The two cases were then consolidated.
ISSUE:
Whether private claimants have a right to secure titles over their occupied portions in
Boracay.
RULE:
Boracay was an unclassified land of the public domain prior to Proc. No. 1064. Such
unclassified lands are considered public forest under PD 705. (exception: lands already
covered by existing titles)
The 1935 Constitution classified lands of the public domain into agricultural, forest or timber.
Of these, only agricultural lands may be alienated. Prior to Proc. No. 1064, Boracay Island
had never been expressly and administratively classified under any of these grand divisions.
Boracay was an unclassified land of the public domain.
There is a presumption of State ownership. The burden of proof in overcoming
such presumption is on the person applying for registration (or claiming ownership), who
must prove that the land subject of the application is alienable or disposable. Absent which,
matters of land classification cannot be assumed.
RATIONALE:
There can be no valid title over "forest lands" or "public forests" and that lands classified as
"forest lands" can be declassified as alienable and disposable lands for agricultural and other
purposes only through a positive act of the Government.2 There can, of course, be no
dispute with the general rule adopted in the cited cases that, until "forest lands" are
declared as alienable and disposable by the Government, they cannot be susceptible of
private appropriation or ownership and registered in the name of any private individual or
entity in any land registration proceeding.
LEGARDA V. SALEEBY

FACTS:
A stone wall stands between the adjoining lot of Legarda and Saleeby. The said wall and the
strip of land where it stands is registered in the Torrens system under the name of Legarda in
1906. Six years after the decree of registration is released in favor of Legarda, Saleeby
applied for registration of his lot under the Torrens system in 1912, and the decree issued in
favor of the latter included the stone wall and the strip of land where it stands.
ISSUE: Who should be the owner of a land and its improvement which has been registered
under the name of two persons?
HELD:
For the issue involved, The Land Registration Act (Act 496) affords no remedy. However, it
can be construed that where two certificates purports to include the same registered land,
the holder of the earlier one continues to hold title and will prevail.
The real purpose of the Torrens system of registration, is to quiet title to land; to put a stop
forever to any question of the legality of the title, except claims which were noted at the
time of registration, in the certificate, or which may arise subsequent thereto. That being the
purpose of the law, once a title is registered the owner may rest secure, without the
necessity of waiting in the portals of the court, or sitting in the mirador de su casa, to
avoid the possibility of losing his land.
The law guarantees the title of the registered owner once it has entered into the Torrens
system.